you heard right....it is truth
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Pilot shortage?
- Thread starter webmaster
- Start date
Good luck on being a talent filter Alex. You should have figured out by now that CNATRA doesn't attrite anybody anymore....
I just ask them to spell Doritos aloud and start the paperwork...
Sadly that is the case at all levels of training now. Everyone gets told that they are a "pump" not a "filter". Assuming that if someone really isn't cut out for the job, they will get attrited at the next level. And by the time they are hitting the fleet it's too late, and everyone assumes they met the standard or they wouldn't have made it past all the previous training.
Many other militaries around the world have an off ramp at about the same place our "experienced senior LT's" are at. Stay in the cockpit, serve up your experience to the junior guys, but you are no longer on the golden path to command and flag. Take the other road and it ends up much like our DH, staff, XO/CO....path. I wonder how much that model might do over here, I know it would make me stay active.
Pump vs. Filter happens in almost every Navy school now. Graduation percentages get put on awards, evals, and fitreps (eg "as head instructor, 99/100 students passed the course"). Of course, passing that high of a percentage often means that the quality of the product goes down, but that logic escapes awards, evals, and fitreps. I have seen a struggling seaman retake a final exam alone in a room full of chiefs and magically pass by the minimum score more than once.
I was a JO in the mid-2000's when there was no DH board and there was a staggering lack of talent in the O-4 ranks at my squadron.
History will repeat itself, although I certainly hope not to that same degree. The 8 year pilot commitment may certainly help boost the numbers on the pilot side.
History will repeat itself, although I certainly hope not to that same degree. The 8 year pilot commitment may certainly help boost the numbers on the pilot side.
Why would they loose their citizenship?
The policy of the State Department is that you only loose citizenship is if you publicly denounce your citizenship to the United States.
Not accurate...overall 3-yr attrition rate has held steady at 21% (all aviation) over the past 10 years (3 yr average, 5 yr average, and 10 yr average).
Under accessions were YGs 05-12. YGs 09/10 had the double-whammy of also getting hit with API REDUX. YG13 accessed to (near) requirement.
Because it is the law. 8 USC § 1481 says the following:
A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality -
(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if
(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or
(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or
.......
(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or
While it is listed on the State Department website that they have "a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to a declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serve in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities" by law if you join the armed forces of a foreign country as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer no matter if the country is hostile or not there no need to declare your intentions to anyone (that is where the 'or' part of the law is key).
A former CO of mine did a PEP tour in Australia and said he came really close to switching over to the RAAF at the end of his tour and commitment but he didn't because the US Embassy there told him point blank he would lose his citizenship. He said he knew others that had joined the RAAF and lost their citizenship though that may have changed since he was 'Down Under'. I have also known of several US citizens who have served in the Israeli armed forces with no reprecussions other than clearance issues. I am not sure what the differences were but policy can change and you might end up on the short end of the stick if you are unlucky.
Sounds like a squadron and community problem and one that a DH screen isn't going to help if they walked out with their quals and an EP. Sounds like something your community needs to fix and not big Navy.
I did my first squadron tour with guys who didn't go through the DH screen and the second with ones who had and while there were some differences the folks were good and bad in about equal amounts. Granted my first squadron was very atypical with over half the DH's being transitions and a few cast-offs from other communities, most were good guys though in and out of the plane (unlike most communties though the DHs were not the experts though, the JOs were) and did well enough to include most of the 'cast-offs' though the few VP dumped on us weren't all that great. And I saw several of my better peers not make it past DH screen in both communities because of timing, luck and poor decisions by some COs. In the end the DH screen can only help so much if your squadron and community leadership doesn't play by the rules though the end result will likely be the same. To borrow the phrase, "the more thigns change......"
I thought I was pretty clear that the VAQ DHs were no better or worse than the VQ(P) ones I had, I had a few real 'winners' as VAQ DHs, making it evident to me that the screen board didn't do much.
VQ(J)? It is VQ(P) and VQ(J) if you really wanted to know or cared......which I doubt
.
VQ(J)? It is VQ(P) and VQ(T) if you really wanted to know or cared......which I doubt
